Regarding the Olympics, too many Christians are failing to distinguish between the glory of overlooking a personal insult and the sin of not being zealous for the Lord’s honor. Failing to react strongly to open public blasphemy does not demonstrate equanimity, but rather that one does not take one’s own religion seriously—and the world i…
Regarding the Olympics, too many Christians are failing to distinguish between the glory of overlooking a personal insult and the sin of not being zealous for the Lord’s honor. Failing to react strongly to open public blasphemy does not demonstrate equanimity, but rather that one does not take one’s own religion seriously—and the world is watching. Taking effective action to prevent things like this does not require violence; it requires Christians to broaden their thinking, break out of the narrow constraints they’ve held themselves within for decades, and explore what kinds of actions might be effective.
And even with a relatively weak response, this may end up being successful in stopping any similar future events, so that will be a victory, even if not a complete and total one.
As for dhimmitude, that is a legal status enforced by violence, and it’s simply not true that western Christians have that status—or at least if it is, let the system come out and enforce it so it’s clear where we stand.
There are examples of multiple ways of handling this.
In Luke 13, a group of people tells Jesus about how the Romans had murdered some Galileans and mingled their blood with the blood of their sacrifices on the altar. In other word, God's altar had been profaned by the Romans. But what does Jesus say? "Unless you repent you will all likewise perish." He doesn't address what the Romans did at all.
I think the key is that there are examples of many ways of handling things in the Bible. So there's no one size fits all. See Ecclesiastes.
That's a good example. At many points the early Christians must have felt immersed in hostility and disrespect for what they believed. In a profoundly 'negative world', they could not have reacted with fury, or with pleas to be granted the status of cultural victims (which as we all know is now the coin of the realm).
I think the best response to the Olympic Blasphemy Tableau is mockery. That is, rather than grant this sad display the implied power of really hurting us, focus on how predictable, been-there-done-that, and outright *boring* this brand of puerile Christian-baiting has become. In a time when drag queen story hour has already passed on into the passé, why reward the talentless designers of this exercise in tedium with that sweet little jolt of outrage that spikes their kombucha? Instead, turn the tables, and tell them, truthfully, that they're dull.
In my experience, cultural lefties cannot handle even mild satire when one of their sacred cows is involved. They like being victims, but certainly not in this way. It's why my lefty friends, even the liberal-Christian ones, cannot even bring themselves to look at the Babylon Bee.
Interestingly, even Tyler Brule of Monocle magazine said the blue guy went over 99.7% of the people's heads, and that there were "a few too many drag queens." It didn't really work artistically, and that was recognized.
The blue guy is surely going over heads of the heads of nearly all the Correct Thinking defenders of this 'pageant'. The small percentage who may actually have heard of Bacchus/Dionysius likely think he really was a cuddly, smurf-like party dude, but how many of them know Euripides's *Bacchae*, in which Dionysius leads a pack of crazed maenads into tearing King Pentheus limb from limb with their bare hands. Fab party game, that!
The more interesting question is if the 'pageant' designers know whom and what they're invoking.
Regarding the Olympics, too many Christians are failing to distinguish between the glory of overlooking a personal insult and the sin of not being zealous for the Lord’s honor. Failing to react strongly to open public blasphemy does not demonstrate equanimity, but rather that one does not take one’s own religion seriously—and the world is watching. Taking effective action to prevent things like this does not require violence; it requires Christians to broaden their thinking, break out of the narrow constraints they’ve held themselves within for decades, and explore what kinds of actions might be effective.
And even with a relatively weak response, this may end up being successful in stopping any similar future events, so that will be a victory, even if not a complete and total one.
As for dhimmitude, that is a legal status enforced by violence, and it’s simply not true that western Christians have that status—or at least if it is, let the system come out and enforce it so it’s clear where we stand.
There are examples of multiple ways of handling this.
In Luke 13, a group of people tells Jesus about how the Romans had murdered some Galileans and mingled their blood with the blood of their sacrifices on the altar. In other word, God's altar had been profaned by the Romans. But what does Jesus say? "Unless you repent you will all likewise perish." He doesn't address what the Romans did at all.
I think the key is that there are examples of many ways of handling things in the Bible. So there's no one size fits all. See Ecclesiastes.
That's a good example. At many points the early Christians must have felt immersed in hostility and disrespect for what they believed. In a profoundly 'negative world', they could not have reacted with fury, or with pleas to be granted the status of cultural victims (which as we all know is now the coin of the realm).
I think the best response to the Olympic Blasphemy Tableau is mockery. That is, rather than grant this sad display the implied power of really hurting us, focus on how predictable, been-there-done-that, and outright *boring* this brand of puerile Christian-baiting has become. In a time when drag queen story hour has already passed on into the passé, why reward the talentless designers of this exercise in tedium with that sweet little jolt of outrage that spikes their kombucha? Instead, turn the tables, and tell them, truthfully, that they're dull.
In my experience, cultural lefties cannot handle even mild satire when one of their sacred cows is involved. They like being victims, but certainly not in this way. It's why my lefty friends, even the liberal-Christian ones, cannot even bring themselves to look at the Babylon Bee.
Interestingly, even Tyler Brule of Monocle magazine said the blue guy went over 99.7% of the people's heads, and that there were "a few too many drag queens." It didn't really work artistically, and that was recognized.
The blue guy is surely going over heads of the heads of nearly all the Correct Thinking defenders of this 'pageant'. The small percentage who may actually have heard of Bacchus/Dionysius likely think he really was a cuddly, smurf-like party dude, but how many of them know Euripides's *Bacchae*, in which Dionysius leads a pack of crazed maenads into tearing King Pentheus limb from limb with their bare hands. Fab party game, that!
The more interesting question is if the 'pageant' designers know whom and what they're invoking.